Skip to main content

About your Search

20120926
20121004
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8
by the federal government, and they are challenging the law that allows this because they are concerned their communications will be picked up. up, and in the course of that surveillance, they have the right to challenge that in court. that is the standing issue. to get to the merits, fisa passed in 1978, and in the aftermath about abuses, it set up a system by which the executive branch would have to go to the court in d.c. and get permission when they wanted to do wiretapping for national security purposes. this is a way of making sure the court -- it had a check and a role in reviewing the efforts to do this wiretapping, which had designed in 1978 is congressthe problem is that in defining the parameters of what communications -- surveillance required court approval. the statute referred to the technology at the time, those communications that were wired, radioed, or satellite technology. since 1978 we have seen a dramatic change of the technology of communications, particularly fiber optic cable, which has changed the court they try to get this case in electronic surveillance. the r
napolitano says the law being drafted is not the sum all one might hope for. [applause] >> well, thank you, and good morning. happy friday to everybody. happy friday. yes, there you go. i want to thank national journal and government executive for inviting me to this year's cyber security summit because i can think of no more important or urgent topic in today's interconnected world. the cyber domain is woven into the fabric of our daily lives. while this increase connectivity has led to significant transformation and advances across our country and, indeed, around the world, it also has increased the importance and complexity of our shared risk. the flip side of all the good that comes from the internet is that cyber attacks have increased significantly over the past decade. indeed, they have increased significantly in the nearly four years that i have served as the secretary of homeland security. here is a quick sense of scale -- just last year, our u.s. computer emergency team, which provides defense against cyber attacks for the federal civilian part of the government as well as privat
aspect of this. the traditional kind of law of war, nation state analysis does not work here in many respects. i think it is time for that nations of the world to have an opportunity to come together and look at a global convention or something of that sort that deals with the need to have a safe cyber environment for everyone's mutual benefit. it is not just about the united states. it is about the countries of the world. >> and that could look like >> the could look like a treaty? >> it could look like any kind of framework. >> steve put yourself in the camp of people in very senior physicians who look at cyber weapons as strategic weapons? you start drawing these analogies to the cold war, the nuclear arms race. the see if the playbacks -- see it that way? >> there is a lot of hot talk. >> it is washington, d.c. >> of questions i want to ask the go back to the executive order. where does the president authority begin and end, regarding a cyber executive order? can he issue the lieberman bill, as an executive order? and you have answered the second part of the harder. the president
mother, one church, one school. our daughters and daughter-in- law's can all go to church and come home. the fight over the rope swing. when meghan has to set the timer in order that they do not fight over the rope swing, i know life is as good as it can get. i started a business in 1975 that has been a foundation for me. when i was nominated i said i will go to all 286 towns all the way to missouri. i did. i am here to tell you i've got to all 382 towns in the 39 counties. i live here. my roots are here. they are going to stay here. >> thank you. each candidate has one minute to answer the question. each will they get 30 seconds of rebuttal time. i have the option to ask a follow-up question of my own. each candidate gets 30 seconds ap's to answer my follow up. we'll also be taking questions on twitter. as you watch this debate, log onto twitter. use the handle ktivelections. this comes from my colleague. >> our national debt topped $16 trillion earlier in the month. for years we heard candidates campaigned on platforms of reducing the national debt only to see little action in washing
individuals to have coverage. if the health care law is repealed, would you favor keeping preexisting conditions coverage? if so, how would you pay for it? >> i support repealing the health care act. i think that is important. what i hear from people across the state of nebraska is that they overwhelmingly support it as well. we don't like the individual mandate. we don't like government coming between a doctor and a patient. preexisting conditions, in visiting with the people in this state, it is very important that we address that. i believe the united states senate will come together and address it. what i will tell you is that we won't pay for it by stealing over $700 billion from medicare. that was the trade-off on the health care act now. that was the deal that was made. that is not sound policy. everyone knows it is not sound policy. what we can do is look for savings. we can look for savings with toward reform. -- with tort reform. over a quarter of the medical procedures that are required now are unnecessary. that is one way we can look for the money. >> senator? >> first of
across the state. i am the wife of 40 years, mother of three grown sons and a daughter in law. i have been a citizen legislator at the last eight years. i work with colleagues in the legislature, and we have taken on issues. we have cut spending, balanced our budget, and we provided tax relief. that is what we do in nebraska, and that is what we need to do in washington. nebraskans are saying enough. they are ready for real change we need to have somebody there who is going to take the nebraska way to washington, and i promise that is what i will do. >> let me assure you that i am still bob kerrey. i looked a little different than i did before, hopefully a little wiser. you know me, you know i went to war, came to nebraska and started a business. i was your governor when we had a recession, and we came through for you. i was your senator when the nation had a recession, another large deficit. we got the job done. i am a candidate because washington is a mess. both parties have made commitments that we cannot keep, and nobody wants to do anything about it. i promise to go to washington
not believe that tommy thompson once signed into law a tammy bald when-scot walker bill. in congress i've worked to advance disability legislation for blinded veterans with congressman -- republican congressman, now senator, john bozeman. i worked with sue myrick, a republican, who passed the serb call cancer -- cervical cancer early diagnosis law. i agree there ought to be real reform in the senate. i think members of congress shouldn't get paid if they don't pass a budget. >> our next question will be from john porter, directed fist to representative baldwin. >> representative baldwin, the population projections for wisconsin are fascinating to look at. it says that by 2035, there's going to be a million and a half people like me who will be 65 or older. and that's twice as many as we have in this state in the year 2000. what do you think the social security -- that social security is going to look like for them given that they have been contributing to it for their entire working lives? >> now, i was raised by my grandparents. i am so lucky that they were there for me when i needed
for medicare in four or five years. the problem is medicare will be insolvent in 2016. under current law and will monti have solved until -- it will not be of solvent until 2014. i just talked about the need to cut spending. i support the affordable health care act. i liked the idea of the pre- existing conditions can no longer be cited as a reason not to underwrite some buddy. -- somebody. prescription drug has already got a benefit, but there are 120,000 in 2014. they get $3,000 each. they are making about $10 an hour. they are going to be able to buy health insurance. they will be more likely to hold their health care together and -- hold their family together. you will have a hard time finding anyone saying they are opposed because of the good it will do to our economy and our people. thus we do disagree, because the $700 million is a cut to those providers, and those providers have said they expected to make it up by the increase in patients that would be coming due to obamacare. we are going to see 23 million people that are going to lose their employer insurance because of the hea
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8